[rfc-i] Update to the v3 format document: draft-hoffman-xml2rfc-01
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed Feb 12 12:23:26 PST 2014
On 2014-02-12 20:55, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> I think it's a sign of sloppy vocabulary design. We can support both inline elements (text, <xref>) and block elements (<t>), but why would we want to allow to combine them?
> Principle of least surprise. Otherwise, I agree.
> Continuing my comments...
> In 2.5:
> Note that RFCs occasionally are
> published with enhanced diagrams; a recent example is [RFC5598].
> I was unable to locate this diagram. A more detailed reference is probably needed.
I believe it used to be available from rfc-editor.org at some point of
time. Here's a version of it: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc5988.pdf>
> That's probably it for the before-call review. I'll pick it up again later... :}
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest